I really enjoy Brittney's new "Kick The Body Before It's Buried" feature on the WKRN 2's Nashville is Talking blog, and although my inner Frenchman stormed out of the room after reading the inaugural post about his friend, Steve Gilliard, I'm certain it brought a smile to his lips for a moment before he went back to grieving. I bet it did the same for Steve's family and the thousands of others who loved and respected him as well. I mean who wouldn't stop preparing for a funeral for a moment to enjoy such hilarious lines as these:

Which brings us to today’s marquee morbidity. The tragic, untimely death of Donk House Negro and all around bigot Steve Gilliard. Who knew that boiling bacon grease in a spoon and mainlining it into the neck vein was bad for your health?

Now that's the kind of witty humor with which I'm sure WKRN 2 Nashville is proud to be associated. I bet your advertisers are thrilled as well. Who wouldn't want their brand associated with vicious personal attacks against the recently dead? I think I'll send the quote over to Vanderbilt Medical Center and CS Scott Construction Equipment to give them a chuckle.

Now I know your blogger, Brittney, isn't the author of those lines, but she deserves a lot of credit for republishing it without comment and thereby repackaging it as a WKRN 2 Nashville product. That young woman is certainly an asset to your organization. You should consider giving her a spot on the nightly news.

I'm thinking of something along the lines of a short in-studio segment where Brittany and WKRN 2 Nashville Weeknight Anchor Allison Hatcher attack someone from the local black community who passed away that day. I bet your writers would have a lot of fun finding new ways to denigrate black people and the circumstances of their death. You might even get State Sen. Stacey Campfield to join in. I'm sure he'd love it.

Let me know if I can help you in any way--I might be able to find you a good deal on white robes or pointed sticks you can use to poke the bodies. I'd be glad to hook you up.

Heterosexually yours (in a chaste and biblically appropriate kind of way, of course)

Gen. JC Christian, patriot

Update: Apparently, Brittney is just plain fucking stupid. I'm told she posted it to expose the original blogger's hatred. Hopefully, she'll post an apology just as prominently.

61 comments:

To be fair to Brittney, the guy who wrote what you've quoted has an annoying talent for writing hateful things and getting angry reactions from people. As a somewhat longtime casual reader of NashvilleIsTalking, I've gotten to the point where I usually skim through any writing of his that's posted on the site, since he sort of gives off an air of a child who says outrageous things just to see who will react.

Given that context/history of the site, I can understand why Brittney just let his writing about Steve Gilliard stand alone in all its hatefulness, since she's made her disapproval of the blogger known multiple times in the past. I am cognizant of the fact that people who've never visited the site before this would be unaware of that. And if I were in her place, I don't know that I would have posted that excerpt on NiT, due to the tastelessness of the writing. Really, though, her job is to feature writing from TN bloggers that is either informative or likely to spark a conversation among readers (and if nothing else, the post in question spreads the word about what an insensitive jerk the blogger who wrote about Gilliard is). So, basically, I don't understand why the outrage about that excerpt (and it is certainly justified, in my opinion) is being directed primarily at her.

And holy crap, that's way more than I intended to write about something that I don't even really have a part in. I'm just of the opinion that the collective ire that's present currently at NiT isn't being aimed in the right direction.

What "jen" says would almost make sense if the headline could be explained away. "Brittney" wrote it. Look at what it says "Teaching Libs a Lesson." What is that supposed to mean? To most people it's definitely going to come off as either an endorsement of the hateful blog post, or at the least an assessment that it was effective. I found his hate screed to be neither agreeable to me (it's downright indecent in fact) nor effective in any way at "teaching a lesson" to any "libs," much less the as-yet unburied Steve Gilliard, which is what she - the WKRN employee, not the quoted blogger, is implying.

Would you feel exactly the same way if the blog had been aimed at your, say, mom? or if it had reference to some vile sex act that she hadn't performed but which was attributed to her with the intentto "spark a conversation among readers"? I think I know the answer to that question.

We certainly do say some pretty outrageous things here at the GJ blog. OF COURSE the blog is clearly labelled as "Political Satire". For something as nasty as the quote in question to be published without qualification smacks of endorsement of its author's opinion.

I think you can have it one of two ways in this situation. Either Brittany is an idiot or she's got a serious racism jones. Well, actually the two are not mutually exclusive. There are far too many people with Brittney's skill set currently working in media and government, perhaps she should consider a different career path.

I'm not jen, but if someone was talking that way about my mom, everyone should just ignore it? I'd rather have the skunk doing it exposed in all his hateful glory. Brittney posted a roundup of clips from local blogs (NiT is a clipping and discussion service for Nashville area blogs; a meta-blogging facility) when Steve Gilliard died, most of them respectful, even admiring. She didn't include this clip in the roundup, because she found itt nasty enough to be highlighted all by its ignorant, bigoted self. She put a great big spotlight on a nasty neighbor, and she put a snarky headline on the clip, just to make sure everyone knew just where it was coming from. If you had read a single additional post on her blog, you would have been able to figure that out. In fact, I admit to being kind of freaked out that readers of a blog like this one (snark, irony, and contempt all being well known here, ya know) didn't figure it out anyway.

Well, I wouldn't want to be unfair to Brittney, but she just boosted the google rank of something really foul for Steve's family to find. It's a bit too much to ask that someone's grieving family appreciate the "irony" of a news outlet approvingly reprinting an attack on someone who's not buried yet.

Um, does anyone else find it ironic that JG is piling on Brittney for using the exact same tactics that he uses? The only difference being that JG does his deadpan sarcastic agreement schtick while Brittney just posted the remarks and let them stand on their own (de)merits.

Seriously JG, I think you have grasped the wrong end of this particular stick. I am a fan, but this makes me wonder if some of the other quotes you have highlighted on this blog might have a different meaning in context as well.

You make a little faux pas (well, actually I think you're in the shit up to your neck) and then attempt to lay the blame for people's reaction on their failure to get the "subtelty" of your headline.

You say you don't agree with the post and yet you have not said why you didn't have some comment appended to it. Apparently you feel that the reader of the blog (who may or may not have been to the blog before) should devine your intent. A number of folks who have written comments in support of you have stated as much as well.

If you go to the Jesus' General blog you will find a note, admittedly on the sidebar that states that the blog is "political satire", not so with your website.

It is apparent that you have no intention of taking responsibility for making, at least, a misjudgement in running the piece in question.

It seems more likely that you are in fact, "manufacturing outrage" yourself.

I do hope Steve's family are unaware of your indefensible lack of journalistic ethics. I also hope that if they become aware of them you have the decency to apologize to them.

If you are a fan of the General's you must know by now that his site is labelled as political satire. There is a HUGE difference between what he does and what is going on the website that Brittany is running.

By the bye, the General's website is not adorned with the callsign of the radio station or any other media outlets.

democommie: I was unaware that official internet regulations require one to post notice that satire is being practiced. Duly noted.

Clearly, anyone's comments can be taken out of context and perhaps it is asking too much for someone as busy as the General to go to the trouble of reading some of Brittney's earlier posts before deciding that she was a no-good racist bigot with no more right to tread 'pon God's clean earth than a weasel.

Perhaps, though, if he were to find the time to check out some more of Brittney's NIT blog he might come to a different conclusion and call off the hounds?

Brittney's post brought Smantix's usual brand of offensiveness to your attention, which you could have reacted to by engaging Smantix. Are there any comments from you over there? NiT and it's companion, Volunteer Voters, bring all sorts of things to readers' attention that they may be offended by and choose to respond to directly. You don't like what Smantix said, you have a conversation with him. Trying to get Brittney in trouble does nothing to address the actual issue of the writing you find offensive, it's just a misguided attempt to shoot the messenger.

And perhaps I'm missing something, but what's the point of including Jacobson's email address in a post calling for Brittney's head?

Seriously, you do a real service to Christians everywhere by spreading hate and prejudice about pointless political rhetoric. Truly, you are doing the Lord's work by focusing so much energy on judging others.

If Jesus Christ taught us anything, it was to insult and berate people at every available opportunity in order to share the message of love.

Yes, I recall very clearly the many times that Jesus called the Pharisees "liberals" and questioned their nationalism in order to incite spiritual change.

I also know for a fact that when Jesus told us not to judge lest we be judged, he meant that ideal only applied to people who aren't perfect and flawless in the eyes of the Lord such as yourself.

With God's divine blessing upon you, I do hope you'll continue to use your gifted self-righteousness to point out to others just how right you are about everything. Surely the Lord will keep you all of your days as you carry on his message of love through hate and acceptance through rejection.

I don't think there are "official rules" about identifying a website as "Political satire". I just said that the General does so with his. Brittney's running a website that is affiliated with a media outlet. If you don't see any difference between what she does and what the General does you need to think about it some more.

Slartibartfast:

Unsophisticated, we may be; clairvoyant, we definitely are not. What you are suggesting is that we should know that a website that is running a hate-filled comment without any qualification or disclaimer, under a headline that is, according to the headline's author, "subtle sarcasm" (way too sublte for me, for sure).

I would suggest, to you, that we are quite well able to understand what we read. When what we read is a re-posting of an especially odious comment by some hate-filled, racist--with no critique, whatsoever--we have no trouble understanding the "aggregators" implicit acceptance of the author's premise. We are not required to familiarize ourselves with Brittney's blog--it's Brittney's job to use her friggin' head for something other than a place to rest her sunglasses.

Rachel:

Trying to get Brittney in trouble will, if nothing else, reveal that her employers are as hypocritic as she is, or that they are willing to do something about such an irresponsible employee's linkage of their corporate identity to her silliness.

Any and all of you who support this young woman:

What she did in letting this event unfold without a.) taking responsibility for her actions and b.) defending her actions in any way that uses the standard of journalistic integrity as a foundation for that defense--is wrong. Many of you do not, it seems, feel that what she did is "wrong" because she's only "the messenger".

You accuse those of us who are sensitive to the implied racism of what she has done of being "hypersensitive". Well, I guess all I can say to that characterization is I NEVER thought "skin color"--which is THE first of Mr. Gilliard's obvious characteristics that the Smantix comment referenced--when I thought of Steve Gilliard.

His opinion that Mr. Gilliard willingly took his own life by choosing to inject bacon fat into the neck vein is one he is free to hold. Brittney is free to repeat it, without commen. We are free to give her a ration of shit for doing so.

In any event all of these testimonials to Brittney's lofty ideals sound like an awful lot of horse pucky.

OK, I buy that. I'm sure Jesus would have made the call that the mourning family were close readers of Tennessee blog aggregators and would totally appreciate the subtle satirical intent behind reposting that filth with an approving headline.

As a Canadian who is aware that Americans hold the notions of ‘freedom of the press’ and ‘freedom of speech’ to be near-holy constitutional rights (whatever happened to separation of church and state in your country? What went so tragically awry? But I digress….), I would like to point out that when Brittney and WKRN 2 published those anonymous author’s words about Steve Gilliard, they became a part of a long history of those who abuse the right of free speech in order to cause real harm to groups depicted in hateful and negative ways. The right of individuals and groups to be protected from the real consequences of such vile expressions of hate should outweigh any claim to freedom of expression. Do you really think that hate speech doesn’t hurt anyone? Do you really think it doesn’t add fervor to hate groups? Do you really think it doesn’t confirm stereotypes that even the liberals amongst us have come to feel are benign and even kinda funny? In Canada, Brittney and her colleagues could be considered criminals under the Criminal Code of Canada as it states that ‘anyone who incites hatred of an identifiable group or promotes hatred is guilty of a criminal offense and will be imprisoned for two to five years.’ What a grand time to be an American!!

So far, I've only read this one post here. But based on the above statement, I'm sure you guys won't mind if I spend the rest of the week spouting off over here making post after post about anything I disagree with or find offensive on this website, and possibly even making all kinds of threats about complaining to who knows all who, without bothering to first familiarize myself with the environment of this website and get a general feel for how it operates and for the players and their personalities.

I mean, obviously if you "are not required" as you said above, why I should be required to familiarize myself with how things work here first before going off about all kinds of things here?

Which I wouldn't, but it doesn't all seem as cut and dried now, does it?

If you regulars over here think it's OK to post and threaten stuff with all guns blazing on NIT without being required to familiarize yourself first with the NIT environment, but it wouldn't be OK for NIT people to come over here and start digging through your site to find things objectionable and offensive without familiarizing ourselves the same with your environment...?

Do you have an argument for that? Because my friend, if you do, then you got bigger problems than I or much of anyone else can ever help you with.

"In Canada, Brittney and her colleagues could be considered criminals under the Criminal Code of Canada as it states that ‘anyone who incites hatred of an identifiable group or promotes hatred is guilty of a criminal offense and will be imprisoned for two to five years.’"

Petiteboise64, thank you for reminding us why we shouldn't move to Canada, even if some shit-for-brains Republican wins the next presidential election.

Canadians and Europeans, who just love to tell us how much "freedom" they have because the government lets them show boobs on TV, sometimes have no fucking clue what freedom is. Yes, our government lets us talk like assholes; that's the price we pay for having freedom of speech. There are risks involved in freedom, bucko, and one of them is just that: Freedom let's people do and say some pretty stupid things. But as bad as it is, it's better than any alternative anyone's ever come up with. Including you Canadian folk.

Sorry, but you can't be a "free" country unless you have freedom of expression. You can't jail people for expressing their opinions and consider yourself to be a "free" country. There's no room for compromise here, pal.

"Update: Apparently, Brittney is just plain fucking stupid. I'm told she posted it to expose the original blogger's hatred. Hopefully, she'll post an apology just as prominently."

Look, obviously you were close to Steve and seeing something so vile and hateful written about him is deeply painful. But she didn't write that shit and she didn't endorse it, even if you think she did.

All of us who are regular readers of NiT site know that a link to a post isn't an endorsement, and Brittney linking to something stupid or hateful isn't uncommon.

As always, the Generals articles are humorous,at times, in completely unintentional ways. The numerous defenses of the Ms. Brittney's questionable judgement are a case study in the absolute "rightness" of her position. Kinda of reminds me of our glorious leader - common sense, courtesy and empathy be damned."I'm right, you're wrong" is always an effective and mature argument. Knee-jerk libs - what a bunch of pussies.

Stuart pointed out that there's a disclaimer: "The views and opinions expressed on this site are those of Brittney Gilbert and not necessarily those of WKRN-TV or its parent company, Young Broadcasting."

OK, so (assuming someone had read it)that more or less implies that is she posted that screed without comment, it WAS an endorsement. Now, it seems pretty clear that she meant the exact opposite. But for someone unfamiliar with the site- like maybe someone doing a roundup of posts on Gilliard's death- it's sure as fuck going to look like she agrees. For regular readers, they know better. So maybe it wasn't really a big fuckup on her part to post without comment, but if you guys can;t see how it looks like an endorsement, well, I don't know what to say.

Also- the one conservative blogger pointed out that often, people don;t even realize they're being parodied or mocked. That could be because conservatives tend to be somewhat irony impaired, or it could be because Brittney just isn't any fucking good at satire.

I looked for the disclaimer and couldn't find it--I'll accept your word that it's there. However; it seems that you and most of your fellow supporters of Brittney still don't understand the monumental difference between what Brittney did and what other bloggers do. She is/was running a blog that features, very prominently, it's affiliation with a local media outlet (and major network affiliate). It's not "color of authority" but it certainly lends a bit of weight to the blog. For her to think that people who might happen upon the blog should understand her "style" and politics is just plain silly.

It appears that she has tendered her resignation from the blog, if not the station. Well, that's certainly her choice. If she believed in what she was doing why would she leave. There were no death threats or anything of the sort in any post that I read. If she felt she was on firm ground, why not explain her position and take on management? IMO, she either lacks the courage of her stated convictions or something else is going on here.

"If you regulars over here think it's OK to post and threaten stuff with all guns blazing on NIT without being required to familiarize yourself first with the NIT environment, but it wouldn't be OK for NIT people to come over here and start digging through your site to find things objectionable and offensive without familiarizing ourselves the same with your environment...?"

Hey, knock yourself out. Part of the fun of a satire site is that sometimes people don't get the satire.

IMO, she either lacks the courage of her stated convictions or something else is going on here.

Actually, basically, for two years she has taken near-daily verbal abuse and often verbal threats, literal threats of all kinds including threats of physical violence, and well as just general daily heaps of insults from a lot of faceless and nameless people who think it's OK to do such things just because someone is a media quasi-celebrity/public figure who is sometimes on TV. As well as some of the same from a rare few who identify themselves.

She's burned out and sick of it, and I would be too, and I would imagine most of you would be two if you spent two years with that kind of daily stress and near-daily abusive and threatening behavior thrown your way just because you're a semi-public figure so people think it's OKAY to make such threats and hurl such abuse.

The timing of yesterday's events just happened to be unfortunate timing as per the resignation, but most of us who know her and have participated there daily have known the stress level was getting higher and higher all the time so while we're all shocked, it's just not that necessarily much of a surprise.

If you or any of your loved ones were in the same position dealing with that crap for two years, I'd expect you'd probably be sick and tired of it by now too.

There's plenty of posts in archives on both NIT and her personal blog to back up that I'm not lying about how constant and prevalent (and vicious and outright dangerously threatening) the abuse hurled her way has been. It's been sickening, and I have always admired her for standing up to it, but I don't much blame her for getting burned out and sick of it all. Especially when the final knife in the back to one of Tennessee's most progressive female liberals and feminists comes from mostly those who profess to be liberals too. Sad.

...should have, of course, read, "too". Sorry about that, it has been a long 36+ hours.

Look, gang, imagine for a minute that you're a media blogger who has become a very public regional figure, and that you're on TV very rarely and occasionally.

Now imagine that, because of that, some faceless/anonymous person thinks it's perfectly okay to inform you that they know where you live and know what times you take your dogs out every day and are going to poison them. Or something even worse that they're going to do to you or your spouse/significant other.

Now think about having to put up with that constantly, as well as constant insults and nastiness often on a daily basis.

That's what I'm talking about. Brittney somehow amazingly has managed to retain a sense of humor about it all most of the time, but I just really can't much blame her for being sick of it all. Doubt any of you would either.

That you went after the woman instead of the male author of this filth speaks volumes, none of it good.

I was prepared to like this blog after you brought on Nezua, but between the way you let the commenters here bury him in white supremacy and the way you're now calling for this woman's harassment, I'm done.

There's an apology owed here, all right, but I don't think it's going to be forthcoming anytime soon, because everyone knows white male progressives can do no wrong. Shame on me for forgetting that core liberal value.

Is that really how you're going to defend this woman? Turning this into a race and gender issue? For fuck's sake, we could do the same thing against Brittney -- she must be a racist and a sexist because she posted a mean comment about a black male! She obviously hates blacks and men!!

It seems like a fairly simple issue: She meant well but she fucked up, and none of her defenders can own up to it. There were all sorts of ways she could have posted that comment -- making it clear that she disagreed and thought the guy was a piece of shit for having said what he said about Gilliard -- but she didn't do a good job conveying that point of view.

That's what she's being criticized for.

From the very outset, the General's post said Brittney wasn't the one who made the comment -- but he took her to task for having posted it without commenting on it. When someone says something utterly viscious and devoid of merit, you ought to point that out rather than merely repeating the statement verbatim. It's not too much to ask.

Anyway, "ilyka," trying to insinuate that the General went after Brittney because she's female is just plain ignorant. Please, if you want to be taken seriously, make a serious argument.

They should feel like shit, autoegocrat, but won't. They'll imagine victory over yet another right-wing southerner and move on to the next thing; I know y'all at The Flypaper Theory ran into that during the last election when liberals outside of Memphis or TN couldn't understand anyone disliking Ford unless they were motivated by race...though frankly I'd take self-identified "blue-staters" (Christ I hate that shit) more seriously if they didn't habitually elect republican governors and mayors in their oases of liberalism...anyway, Brittney has run into shit from all sides during her entire time with NiT (and before that, on her own blog). I can't blame her at all for extracting herself from it.

I did, though, like the running arguments in these comments about how to actually practice satire, interspersed with several posters who seemed to take the general seriously as a right-wing tool.

Have you considered the possibility that, if given a choice, I nearly always choose to confront a paid media blogger rather than an obviously deranged blogger of no consequence? That was the choice I made in regard to Nashville is Talking.

And your concern about my treatment of Nez is nonsense. I have a very laissez-faire attitude about comments. Most regular commenters will tell you it is far too laissez-faire. I let people speak their mind and seldom ban anyone. As a matter of fact, I think I've banned maybe three people over the last year or so (after deciding to ban more aggressively) and one of them was someone who was unfairly hounding Nez, so perhaps you should shut the fuck up.

I've never attempted to edit anything Nez has ever written. I've never warned him not to write something. He has been, and continues to be, welcome to post anything he likes here at any time--I've even issued an invitation to him to be a regular Saturday blogger. That's not to say I agree with everything he writes, but I've never told him he couldn't write it.

You don't know the ramifications I suffered because of his last post here--I haven't chosen to write about it until now. I disagreed with much of that post, but I felt that the central idea--that progressive bloggers, including myself, were AWOL during the LA Police Riot, and that we were not as committed to defending the rights of immigrants as we should be. I felt so strongly about it, I shopped the post around to… I don't now, 30 or 40 other major bloggers. They didn't quite see it the same way. I lost two friends over it, one a very big blogger with whom I traded two or three emails a day, called me an asshole and no longer emails me or responds to mine. Another, who has a weekly feature which linked to me 100% of the time, hasn't linked to me since.

My response to all of that was to offer Nez the regular Saturday gig I mentioned earlier. So don't you dare tell me I've wronged Nez. You don't have a fucking clue.

whoa....i lag a few days in reading blogs and the blogosfere explodes.

i just wanted to say that JG has been just like he sez he has been with me in the post above. to the letter. and i don't know, honestly, that it was his job to keep people off of me for the most part in the threads. maybe when people cross the lines of respect for his blog, overall...otherwise, that is his call as a friend...or blogowner or something. i don't know. and if we judged him on what a "friend does," or "blogowner does" well...who can rule on that? it's all relative to what we would do as individuals.

but i certainly wouldn't say he mistreated me. patriotboy gave me an opportunity here because he likes my writing and there were no strings, and always stood behind me as far as i saw it. its like he says, he offered me a full time slot after tha tlast post that raised such fire. and i beleive every word he says about what havoc rose up when he emailed it around. he told me when that happened that they "just didnt get it." as far as i see that particular incident, he saw truth in (some of!) what i wrote there, and he put his principles on the line for it. respect.

NOW, a note: i have not researched this latest fiasco, on this "britney" and all that was posted about gilliard or something. i JUST found this link from ilyka's blog and i do'nt even know what the hell is going on. for all i know, JG has held up a liquor store and mowed down a platoon of chota on the way, so i'm not giving blanket approval or endorsement here for All JG Has Done or Will Do. but i wanted to address "did JG treat Nez fair." on the rest, i guess i'll give my opinion, if its needed once i know what is going on. but i do not.

ilyka, i respect and appreciate the support you've always given me. it means a lot, too, that you would say this here when you see it that way. that is courage, too. but if you knew of my personal dealings with JG, you'd know that i have respect for them, with reason. i mean, that's how i see it.

"It was a lazy post, and it’s my own fault that people misunderstood me."

Maybe those who have so staunchly come to her defense here, blaming that blog post's readers and those like JG for their reactions (ie. not getting her "satire"), ought to take that as a sign that they were out of line.

I hadn't read that blog until today and was stunned by that vile post. If you're a blogger, you owe your readers clarity. If you can't give them that, you might as well find another hobby or profession as she has now decided to do.

I think it's fair to say that a lot of folks are upset about all of this. That's okay, it's the way these things go, sometimes. What I find disturbing is the number of gratuitous insults that have been hurled and the name calling.

I would have to go back and read my own posts to know for certain. But I don't think I called anybody a fucking moron, an asshole or assorted other names. Not that I'm above that sort of thing, it just didn't happen today. I just noticed that the level of invective kept creeping up the scale. Say anything you want about me, it really doesn't affect me a whole lot. But when you refuse to admit to the fact that the post was ill-advised and that the way Brittney handled the ensuing brouhaha was the right way to do it--well, maybe name calling is the only arrow left in your quiver.

Brittney had a job, as a progressive blogger. She nuanced so well that even trolls didn't know what hit them. Some kind of freak progressive blogger with nothing but hate and bullseyes took her out. A professional troll, as it were.

JC, why not embody the stereotype of the East Coast elitist? Because the South/Midwest/&c. really is populated by hicks, run by rednecks, and the kind of place no right-thinking person would ever want to visit. Aren't you better than this?

Hey, "Scott Eric Kaufman," I'm from the Midwest. Chicago, to be precise. So, leave the Midwest the fuck out of your anti-"East Coast Elitist" rant. I'll side with my friends on the East Coast any friggin' day.

'Sides, th' Gen'rul's from the Wild Wild West, you genius.

Sheee-it, when will they learn that the Midwest is nothing like the South?

My understanding is that Brittney resigned over her history of blogging and abuse, and the reactions to this post, JG's amongst them, were merely the straw. So it is unfair to blame the General for Brittney's resignation.

It's also unfair to make some sort of claim that Brittney was fired or lost her job because of the General.

She resigned. She has agency. She is an effective, rational adult. She resigned.

Personally, I think both Brittney and the General screwed up. Comedy is hard work, and they are hard workers, but it is hard, and they are not the comediers.

I don't see the reactions left on Brittney's blog anywhere close as to being so horrid as to require her resignation.

I don't see how the General is some sort of misogynist either.

I do note that this sort of misdirected focus on WIMMINS issues is the hallmark of the the Pandagonians. It's a bullshit, issues hijacking, thread jacking, it's all about me, the evil Patriarchy is fucked up, you as a man are fucked up kind of nonsense.

This is because of a post of maha's in which she was talking about how the identity politics is killing liberalism. In the comments some folks claimed that maha was saying an african american commenter was a racist, and said, of course african americans can't be racist, THEY ARE BLACK for heaven's sake!!!!

Well ain't that just like the modern feminists. (Note: I am not saying ALL feminists, just sadly, "modern" feminists of the sort that like to claim that any other sort of feminist is an anti-feminist. The Pandagonians, Feministes, IBTPs, Feministings, ...)

Modern feminists poop (I think) but their shit don't stink. Modern feminists can call other people names (misogynists, MRAs, FRAs, godbags, ...) but modern feminists make sure that no one can say anything that would make fun of women or classes that they feel should be protected.

I lived in DC for awhile. Does that give me enough East Coast stink to make me personna non grata in the Heartland. Wait, it's only wrong if it's the South that's on the receiving end of regional bias. Run down the east coast and bitch about the cities all you want, but by God don't make fun of my my sacred cow (hereford).

I truly have no desire to visit Nashville. I know that's hard to believe. I don't want to visit Topeka, Jacksonville, Bismark, Lincoln or even Liberal either. Oh and Branson, no way in hell. Does that make me a provincial bigot?

I like San Antonio, and I'd like to see Atlanta, Austin, Charleston, New Orleans, and any number of towns in the Mississippi Delta where they still play the blues. Does that change anything?

When I lived in Utah, all my liberal friends would get angry when outsiders made snide comments about how conservative and backward it is. I'd always point out that perhaps we deserved the reputation because we passed a law allowing for spousal rape and killed an anti-incest bill because it was "anti-family."

I know it's hard to be a liberal in a red state. I lived it. But, if you can't get enough people organized to change things then perhaps you deserve the reputation

Wow. Just. Wow. I've been a devoted reader of Jesus' General for quite a while, but now I see that he is as completely incapable of admitting he is wrong as George W. Bush. I'll never visit again.

General, Progressives in the South DO work hard to change perceptions. You have no idea how hard we work, nor of the scorn and hatefulness we have to fight each and every day, not only from the backwards amongst us, but from those who choose to hold our region up to ridicule from their comfy spots in the blue states. Brittney was one of us who was doing an excellent job of working to bring our region out of the grips of the Republicans and enlighten the rest of the country as to the existence of progressive southerners, until your drive by assassination. If you had bothered to do a bit of research before you destroyed her career as a progressive paid blogger in the South, then I would like to think that you would have directed your ire at the right wing nutjob she exposed, but, based on your responses I can see clearly that you are as clueless and as morally reprehensible as those you have skewered so aptly in the past.

You, sir, are a hypocrite, and worse, even if considered archaic in these pitiable days, you have no honor and are not a gentleman. I think Steve Gilliard, a man of honor and no one's hypocrite, would be ashamed of you and what you have done. Too bad that you are far too arrogant to feel shame.

You and other commenters, in your attempts to justify Brittney's idiotic blunders (the original post, the disdainful dismissal of a complaint and the decision to leave her job--rather than deal with the shit storm she created) have consistently accused the General of, among other things; misogyny, arrogance, mean-spiritedness, bullying, insensitivity, betrayal--the list of his perceived offenses is long.

There have been comments on the WRNK blog that are even uglier than that dreck, authored by Smantix, that Brittney originally linked to and highlighted. These comments are apparently some sort of support for Brittney. If one of my "supporters" has to say that a dead friend of someone else is "an asshole" as their way of showing common cause, I don't need that kind of support.

You folks (I am assuming that you're one of Brittneys apologists) have no problem with trashing everyone over here (in fairness some folks over here are in the same state of high dudgeon) but you consistently fail to explain how, in the name of whatever you hold sacred, Brittney's actions did NOT cross the boundaries of taste, decorum or journalistic ethics.

Brittany, apparently, has a degree in Journalism. I took exactly one course in that discipline in 1968. I think that one of the very first things I learned was about the power of the press and it's concomitant responsibility to "get it right" factually and to be informative instead of inflammatory. What Brittney did in posting that crap written by Smantix, without any qualification, was the same sort of bush-league editorializing-as-news practiced by the Fox News organization and others of their ilk.

It's become fairly obvious that a lot of regulars at NiT were so enamored of Brittney's blog that they would countenance her actions in the incident as being okay. It's horseshit. You folks all seem able to rip anybody a new one who disagrees with you--work on the station where she was employed, that might have some effect.

If Brittney's your friend, have some coffee or a few cocktails with her and figure out your next move. Or continue to waste your energy blaming the General for Brittney's being hoist on her own petard.